Abraham Adams wrote: In light of all of VN's comments on his own works' aesthetic
autonomy and lack of social significance, etc, I think it might be
interesting to discuss this story's similarity to certain Formalist ideas (
following JM suggestion to examine the relationship bt. Nabokov,symbolist poets
and, in particular, Baudelaire's "Correspondances". Abraham states that " This
particular poem was taken up by Russian Formalist Vjacheselav Ivanov as
a semiotic theory..."
He added: " This description is
quite similar to that of referential mania."
Next he wrote: VN's opposition to the
Soviet literary traditions seems pretty clear:as Donald Barton Johnson observes
in an August 1993 post to the list (...) Does referential mania add
anything to the tempting similarity of "total lack of social
significance" (VN) to "art has always been free of life" (Shklovsky)?
[...] As far as I understand the relationship to “higher reality” seen
in Ehrlich/Ivanov, it refers to the realm of significance/meaning
(the unity of this and a higher reality quickly becomes a unity of
signifier and signifier- so the only higher reality appears to be
that of meaning). But I recall various statements by both VNs about
the work's “otherworldliness”--
Jansy Mello: The
diagnostic made by "Herman Brink" ( "referential mania") seems to me
to be one of Nabokov's inventions and a very significant one.
I'm still checking the
psychiatric terms that were used in America at the time the novel was
written ( 1946/48),but obtained no positive information yet.
What I can advance, though, is that
"Delusions of Reference" appear in what was formerly named "Manic
Depressive Psychosis" and in "Paranoia." but I found no designation
of "referential mania", as such).
Common dictionaries describe "mania",
"manic states" and inform that the word "mania" comes from the Greek
for "madness".
As I wrote before, I consider
"madness" ("mania") in Nabokov a sign for his having introduced
elements that defy "common-sense" and that pertain to his own
other-world metaphysics and his vision of art/science.
In the case of
S&S, VN described the adolescent's plights in detail without
considering standard psychological terms or a precise symptomatology (
the narrator had the parent's describe how the young man "excluded real people from the conspiracy.")
Nevertheless, VN might have based his
stories on details observed in people he knew. At the time when the
novel was written little was known about autism, and Asperger in particular
( the "Savant's" extraordinary mnemonic and intellectual feats, talent
with numbers, chess-games and often, synaesthesia) but VN must have
met young boys who had these talents: Alexander Luzhin's phobias and his
unsociability at school, his genius with chess are suggestive of it
and, in the present novel, so are the boy's
initial behavior, lack of social
skills, "inventiveness", drawing abilities. Also his parents
considered him a "prodigiously gifted child".
After a prolonged
convalescence from pneumonia we learn that things radically changed
because the boy became "totally
inaccessible to normal minds." ( a
revealing way of describing his affliction) and, in my opinion, it was when the
"normal" people of his environment began to consider him "mentally
deranged". So the unfortunate boy was institutionalized!
I believe it is only on paragraph
seven, part one, that VN uses his trademark style writing
about "minute and module...undulation ...volume and
volubility...granite and groaning.." to give word to the adolescent's
misdirected hypersensitivity.
The
reference to the Symbolists came from Nabokov's Otherworld
by Vladimir E. Alexandrov, when he explained that "irony and faith need
not be incompatible. Indeed, this blend was fundamental for the German
Romanatics...and was widespread amont the Symbolists... Another link between
Nabokov's metaphysics and aesthetics hinges on his seminal epiphanic
experiences..."(page 7,Ardis) Both Mallarmé and Baudelaire were known
to have "synesthaesia", like Nabokov.
I wish I could discuss Abraham's arguments more
fully but I'm unfamiliar with Soviet literary traditions and Russian
Formalism and unable to opine ( my familiarity with terms such
as "Signifier", or "meaning" proceed mainly from
Lacan).