Gary Lipon wonders whether or not Shade is serious when he says “Other men die; but I am not another; therefore I’ll not die.”  On its face, the syllogism is clearly a joke.  I don’t see why we should think that Shade doesn’t know that it’s a joke, nor do I see any compelling evidence that Shade honestly believes himself to be immortal.  (Wishing is another thing.) As I read it, the genius of this syllogism is that the error we all see (the notion that mortality hinges on “other” rather than on “men”) hides a more telling second flaw (the notion that Shade is not another).  Shade is making a joke, but the joke is on him.  In my favored reading of the novel, where Kinbote and Shade are alternate personalities, we see that Shade is indeed another, which leads to an incredible triple (possibly quadruple?) irony.  If we follow the unfolding revelations, we might see it like this:

Other men die; but I am not another; therefore I’ll not die.

But Shade is another; therefore, according to his own logic, he will die.

But because Shade became a “fat fly” (Kinbote) he did not die on Goldsworth’s lawn.

However, because Shade’s personality died, Kinbote’s parasitic personality could not ultimately persist, leading to K’s suicide.

Thus, Shade died.

There are legitimate cases to be made against a theory of secondary personalities, but this passage is one that reveals itself most fully and marvelously only in the context of a reading where Shade and Kinbote share a body. In a traditional reading, Shade’s assertion, “I am not another,” has no meaningful resonance at all, as the weight of our attention falls merely on the conclusion’s ironic foreshadowing.  I consider that a loss.

Best,

Matt Roth

All private editorial communications are read by both co-editors.