[HN Gopher] Don't be terrified of Pale Fire
___________________________________________________________________
Don't be terrified of Pale Fire
Author : lermontov
Score : 131 points
Date : 2024-06-04 06:48 UTC (16 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (unherd.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (unherd.com)
| block_dagger wrote:
| I was excited to read Pale Fire after reading what I consider to
| be one of the finest novels ever written, Lolita. The protagonist
| is a monster, but the writing is so eloquent - and not even in
| the author's original tongue! Pale Fire was simply boring to me.
| I am not extremely literary, so a lot of it probably went over my
| head, but I was rather disappointed it didn't shine like his 1955
| masterpiece.
| hyperadvanced wrote:
| I had gone through this on first reading of Pale Fire. Had to
| come back to it. Was worth it given how short and good PF is.
| barrkel wrote:
| To be fair, he spoke English from a very young age, he was
| raised trilingual and read and wrote English before Russian. I
| think there's a case to be made that being able to read 3
| distinct languages with native fluency contributed to his
| lexical dexterity and mastery of metaphorical imagery.
| therealdrag0 wrote:
| Same.
|
| I also found myself thinking "wait he can't be serious about
| this poetry it's not good". And upon googling found that
| readers are split many many people think the poetry is
| seriously good.
| zabzonk wrote:
| it is so funny, and the poem is great. it is short, and easy to
| read. have at it!
| johngossman wrote:
| Recently read "Pale Fire" for the first time. It's insanely good.
| Another review I read made the comment "Nabokov spoils you for
| other books." It's funny, with beautiful sentences, engaging, and
| the overall format is a welcome break from the normal narrative
| form.
| oraknabo wrote:
| Pale Fire is, without a doubt, my favorite thing Nabakov ever
| wrote. I've been through it at least 5 times but I don't feel as
| if I've ever fully read it cover-to-cover like other novels. It's
| just a rough draft of an epic poem (of specious quality) and a
| bunch of publisher's notes, but it's always intriguing and
| surprisingly funny.
| The_Blade wrote:
| It is sandwiched between Pnin and Speak, Memory
|
| But I really love Invitation to a Beheading. he wrote in three
| languages!
| acabal wrote:
| _Pale Fire_ has been my favorite book for a long, long time, ever
| since I read it as part of a course in university. After all
| these years I haven 't read a better, more intricately-
| constructed book.
|
| It was suggested to me to read the intro first, then skip the
| poem and read the endnotes start to finish, then to go back and
| read the poem. The index is part of the fiction and must also be
| read.
|
| I think the keys to really enjoying _Pale Fire_ are 1) to realize
| that while the subject matter is ostensibly serious, Kinbote is
| really a comic figure, and you 're meant to be laughing a lot of
| the time; and 2) the great puzzles to unravel are who is John
| Shade, who is Charles Kinbote, are any of them even real, and who
| wrote the poem? The book is so beautifully written that it can be
| argued that none of those questions have definitive answers - and
| thinking about them, and how Nabokov threads clues and
| possibilities throughout the novel, without any of them seeming
| to be contradictory, is the pleasure.
| zem wrote:
| > It was suggested to me to read the endnotes first, start to
| finish, then to go back and read the poem.
|
| I read it with two copies open, so that I was reading the poem
| and the endnotes in parallel.
| fsaid wrote:
| Shade's diminished excitement for evidence of the afterlife
| after meeting "Mrs.Z" was a surprisingly funny moment in the
| poem (even before he discovered the misprint of _mountain_ to
| _fountain_ ). So much so that I wasn't sure if I was
| misinterpreting the poems content. But if (I
| thought) I mentioned that detail She'd pounce upon it as
| upon a fond Affinity, a sacramental bond, Uniting
| mystically her and me, And in a jiffy our two souls would
| be Brother and sister trembling on the brink Of
| tender incest.
| OldGuyInTheClub wrote:
| "Kinbote is really a comic figure"
|
| I say this name in Christopher Lloyd's voice: "That's Kinbotay!
| Tay! Tay!!"
|
| In my head, of course.
| lagniappe wrote:
| The Bucket/Bouquet conundrum
| optimalsolver wrote:
| Any relation to Lord Kinbote of X-files fame?
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIyDJxP-b6o
| causi wrote:
| _none of those questions have definitive answers_
|
| I will limit my criticism to saying that this is a trope
| adopted very often these days and it is not one to which my
| personality is suited. I like mysteries but I do not like
| treadmills, running without arriving.
| nimih wrote:
| What do you mean by "these days?" Pale Fire was written in
| 1962.
| Angostura wrote:
| Presumably that it is a trope widely adopted these days.
|
| It may have been more novel in 1962, but the commenter
| might still not enjoy it
| seanhunter wrote:
| Pale fire is a great book, beautifully written and not
| particularly hard to read. Strongly recommend it.
| adolph wrote:
| Interesting:
|
| _The connection between Pale Fire and hypertext was stated soon
| after its publication; in 1969, the information-technology
| researcher Ted Nelson obtained permission from the novel 's
| publishers to use it for a hypertext demonstration at Brown
| University._
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_Fire
| cxr wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23491587
| recursive wrote:
| Funny to think that we're this far into the "information era",
| and your choices for consuming this book are either physical
| paper, or general (non-hypermedia) ebook.
| haroldp wrote:
| If you are going to read Pale Fire, get it on paper. I tried to
| read it on my Kindle and the UI is not up to task of lots of
| flipping back and forth between the poem and the prose sections.
| oraknabo wrote:
| I can't imagine trying to manage this on an e-reader. If the
| notes popped up in a window over the text it would be an ideal
| way to experience the book, but every epub reader I've ever
| used makes jumping around a pain and I have a really hard time
| even hitting the index links on a touchscreen.
| vundercind wrote:
| When I tell people the UI of paper books is in _most ways_
| superior to ebook readers, this is the kind of thing I mean.
|
| They do take up a shitload less space, which is a pretty big
| advantage, though.
| haroldp wrote:
| I would disagree strongly with this. :)
|
| The e-reader UI is generally so much better than paper, if a
| book is not available for kindle, I'll usually find something
| else to read. Pale Fire is a special case book where you want
| two have bookmarks where you are currently working. I read
| Chuck Palahniuk's Diary on paper, and an e-reader would
| definitely have ruined it.
|
| Technical books with a lot of charts, diagrams, monospaced
| code examples, etc can highlight the weaknesses of e-readers.
| PDFs are almost always better on a tablet.
|
| But for like, words-in-a-row novels that don't mind being re-
| wrapped, there is no comparison, for me. e-Reader every time.
| vundercind wrote:
| Yes, they are fine for books with no features but body text
| and no important formatting or layout, and that the reader
| progresses through entirely linearly. Those are the sorts
| of books they're best-suited to.
| haroldp wrote:
| > Those are the sorts of books they're best-suited to.
|
| Which is 98% of novels. e-Readers are even great for
| books with lots of end notes or foot notes. It's great
| for flipping between those. I had no problem reading
| Infinite Jest, for example.
|
| I guess if my copy of Pale Fire had hyperlinked all the
| poem line mentions, I would have been fine. :)
|
| Now I'm wondering if I could write a quick script to
| annotate mine thusly...
| adammarples wrote:
| Ie. 99% of fiction books
| the_af wrote:
| 100% agreed.
|
| I'm the kind of reader that goes back and forth when reading
| a novel. I like to go back and re-read when a character was
| introduced, or simply go back a few pages.
|
| The UI of the Kindle sucks for this. It excels at finding a
| specific sentence, of course, but not for the kind of
| flipping pages I enjoy doing.
| xhkkffbf wrote:
| Some readers say that paper sucks too. The right scheme is to
| get two copies that advance together. So they could be either
| Kindle or paper or a mixture.
| the_af wrote:
| Who says that paper sucks? I've never met such a reader, and
| there are many readers among my friends and family.
|
| What people who adopted e-readers often say is that e-readers
| can be _more convenient_ and take less space.
|
| But nobody says "paper sucks".
| zem wrote:
| i read it on a kindle and a laptop so i didn't need to flip
| back and forth
| Fezzik wrote:
| I love seeing anything Nabokov related pop-up here; all of his
| books are lessons in how powerful fictional characters can be
| when crafted well. Read all of his books as soon as you can!
| gwbas1c wrote:
| Is this a "Bookworm's book?"
|
| Much like a "skier's mountain" or a "band's band," is this the
| kind of book that only appeals to a narrow audience that likes to
| pick apart the mechanics of a book?
|
| Or is this a book like Harry Potter, which was panned by the
| critics, but otherwise is awesome popular fiction?
| Tycho wrote:
| The 'hook' of _Pale Fire_ is this: ostensibly you 're reading a
| long-form poem with a foreword and footnotes and editing by a
| friend of the poet (a poet of some eminence), but it soon
| becomes apparent that the editor is trying to jam his own life
| story into those footnotes.
|
| If you like that idea, I think you'd like the book.
| waveBidder wrote:
| ah, so the same genre as House of Leaves
| derbOac wrote:
| Yeah, strangely enough I never connected Pale Fire to House
| of Leaves until this article and thread. Puts a slightly
| different spin on House of Leaves for me.
| vundercind wrote:
| Other books I know of that play with part or all of the text
| itself being an artifact of the fiction:
|
| - _The Third Policeman_ , Flann O'Brian. Fictional scholar of
| a fictional esoteric philosopher weaves his commentary on
| same philosopher into an account of his... journey.
|
| - _If on a Winter's Night a Traveler_ , Italo Calvino. You(!)
| embark on an adventure to find the book you believed you
| purchased, which was _If on a Winter's Night a Traveler_ by
| Italo Calvino.
|
| - _The Princess Bride_ , William Goldman. This has a _very
| different_ framing narrative from the film, and is very much
| worth a read.
|
| (Setting aside epistolary novels like _Dracula_ )
| BeFlatXIII wrote:
| _House of Leaves_, Mark Danielewski. This one has at least
| two layers of meta story. The body of the text is a long-
| form analysis written by a blind man of a fictional film.
| The extensive footnotes are of the guy who found the
| manuscript after the blind man died.
| 5040 wrote:
| I'm reminded of Canada's first weird tale (probably), 'A
| Strange Manuscript Found in a Copper Cylinder' by James De
| Mille.
|
| _The narrative structure of Strange Manuscript is that of
| a story within a story. The frame story has four
| characters. Lord Featherstone, a British aristocrat, has
| fled the boredom of society to cruise the south seas in his
| yacht. He is accompanied by Dr. Congreve, a medical doctor
| who is knowledgeable in such fields as geography, botany,
| and paleontology; by Noel Oxenden, a Cambridge scholar who
| is an expert on philology; and by Otto Melick, "a
| litterateur from London". The four are becalmed in mid-
| Atlantic when they discover a copper cylinder containing a
| letter and a manuscript written on an unusual material
| which the doctor later identifies as papyrus. To while away
| the time, they take turns reading the manuscript aloud,
| pausing between turns to discuss its contents and debate
| its authenticity._
|
| The author seems to have been a rather cool dude
|
| _Among the books from his library presented by the family
| to Dalhousie College are hymnologies of the Greek Church, a
| beautiful set of Euripides, works in modern Greek,
| Sanskrit, and Persian showing signs of use, as well as
| French, German and Italian classics with pencilled
| marginalia, all attesting the breadth of his intellectual
| interests. Since his death, his best book, A Strange
| Manuscript Found in a Copper Cylinder has been published by
| Harper 's. It anticipates such romances as King Solomon's
| Mines, being a tale of wild adventures in an Antarctic
| Topsy-turveydom where lovers fly about on tame
| pterodactyls, and utter unselfishness is the chief aim in
| life of the highly civilised (but cannibal) inhabitants.
| [...] De Mille was a tall, handsome, dark man, an excellent
| teacher, a good conversationalist, best in monologue, an
| amateur musician, an adept at caricatures and comic verses;
| in short, a most unusual personality._
| lukas099 wrote:
| _S._ by Doug Dorst and J.J. Abrams is a book called Ship of
| Theseus with hand-written back and forth marginal notes
| from two college students who take turns borrowing it from
| a library. It comes with loose pieces of literature stuck
| in the pages. It 's not on the literary level of _Pale
| Fire_ or anything but it was definitely enjoyable.
| jws wrote:
| Another interesting variant of "annotations are the star" is
| "But What of Earth?" by Piers Anthony. It's an old school
| sort of sci fi story, but the publisher rewrote it in the
| publishing process. Eventually Anthony got the rights back
| and published the first draft with the editor's changes and
| his commentary on it. I think it was intended to be
| commentary on the publishing business, but as a way of
| knowing an author, you come away feeling like you know the
| guy in a way you don't get from carefully crafted stories.
|
| It's one of those old paperbacks I _know_ I wouldn 't have
| tossed, but darned if I can find my copy to reread. Maybe I
| loaned it and it found a new home. Maybe you have it.
|
| (Do remember, he is a 55 year old man writing this in the
| '80s. Some of his world view is... archaic?... in the greater
| society today.)
|
| You want the Tor version from 1989, not the Laser version
| from 1976.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| I went to grab a sample on Kindle... But, argh, it's not
| available on Kindle!
| grey-area wrote:
| > otherwise is awesome popular fiction
|
| It could be described as many things, but popular fiction it
| will never be.
| 101008 wrote:
| It is popular and it is fiction, how can you say Harry Potter
| will never be that?
| lief79 wrote:
| Fairly sure he was talking about Pale Fire, not Potter.
| bazoom42 wrote:
| It is an elaborate joke on works with lots of footnotes and
| editorial commentary. If you are familiar with this kind of
| text you migt enjoy it. Otherwise it will probably fall flat.
|
| If you like Borges or Godel, Escher, Bach you will enjoy this.
| xwiz wrote:
| Wow, sounds tailor made for me. I'm part way through GEB, and
| I have a Borges collection arriving tomorrow.
| short_sells_poo wrote:
| Judging by the commentary in the thread, it's very likely not
| the Harry Potter case :D
|
| It sounds like the best analogy to the book are abstract
| paintings. There are people who can appreciate them, but it is
| an acquired taste...
| vundercind wrote:
| It is _literary_ fiction, yes, to put the point more
| succinctly.
| OldGuyInTheClub wrote:
| The former. Tankers full of literary ink have been spilled on
| this book.
| OldGuyInTheClub wrote:
| It's a good book that I've read a couple of times but a tiring
| one. Nabokov puts so many traps and misdirections in it that it
| becomes a cryptic crossword in a distant language. He is a very
| smart and clever guy and never tires of reminding the reader of
| it. He lampoons academia while enabling many an academic career
| in the process. There are professors aplenty specializing in
| Nabokov and some in Pale Fire itself.
|
| For s&g I read "Nabokov's Pale Fire : The Magic of Artistic
| Discovery" by Brian Boyd, one of the aforementioned. It was
| interesting at first to see how literary criticsm and analysis
| work but eventually I had a Shatner moment.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| Shatner moment?
| OldGuyInTheClub wrote:
| Saturday Night Live sketch circa 1986. He's at a Star Trek
| convention in a small town and finally snaps at the trivia-
| mad, stalkerish fans telling them to "Get life, will you
| people?!"
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| We must be similar ages; i just happened not to see that
| one. Thanks
| glial wrote:
| I have not yet read Pale Fire, but I loved Lolita and hope to
| read it soon. Nabokov's writing is so rich, the writing itself
| (aside from the story!) is worth lingering over and savoring.
| I've only found a few other writers with a similar quality -
| Proust, Milton, perhaps Cormac McCarthy and Toni Morrison. Does
| anyone know of authors with a similar property? I'm not even sure
| what to call it, so it's difficult to search for.
| habosa wrote:
| East of Eden by John Steinbeck is at the top of my list for
| pure literary beauty (and I also love most of the authors you
| mentioned)
| vundercind wrote:
| Faulkner. Woolf, though more in some books than others.
| atombender wrote:
| I would check out John Crowley, starting with Little, Big. One
| of the great American prose stylists.
|
| Hilary Mantel is very good. I haven't read the Wolf Hall books,
| but A Place of Greater Safety is beautiful and deserves to be
| better known.
|
| I would also nominate Gene Wolfe, especially The Book of the
| Sun. Fits very well with the subject matter of Nabokov, as it
| is also a clever metatextual puzzle, albeit a very different
| kind.
| therealdrag0 wrote:
| You can hang out in /r/proseporn to get samples.
|
| I'd recommend "All the kings men" by Robert Penn Warren. It
| sounds like a political book but it's not. It's more like The
| Great Gatsby in that the structure is as much about the
| narrator. Also the writing lapses into "overly poetic" like
| McCarthy.
| leephillips wrote:
| Look into Marc Leyner, especially the novel _Et Tu, Babe_ and
| anything he wrote before that. He specifically set out to
| create prose where each sentence could stand alone as something
| beautiful. I think he's not often taken seriously because he's
| simply so extremely funny that he gets pigeonholed as a comic
| writer. But as his best he crafted English prose at the highest
| level.
| _virtu wrote:
| This is hilarious. I bought the book after watching Blade Runner
| 2049. There's a scene where some of book was being recited as
| part of the protagonist's anti-empathy test and I figured it had
| to have a deeper importance to the writers so I grabbed it on a
| whim. It's been sitting on my shelf. Now I'll have to move it up
| the list after seeing this.
| dilyevsky wrote:
| The book is also in the film - joi offers to read it to k in
| their first scene I think. Another cool reference there is K's
| ringtone is Prokofiev's Peter and the Wolf which every soviet
| kid should recognize from their childhood
| 8f2ab37a-ed6c wrote:
| Specifically the David Bowie version from 1978
| easyKL wrote:
| You might enjoy this video: _Blade Runner 2049 | "Cells
| Interlinked" and Pale Fire (LITERALLY ME! INCELS INTERLINKED)_
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtLvtMqWNz8
| _virtu wrote:
| I watched it. Thank you for the recommendation.
|
| Sounds absolutely fascinating. I just started the second
| Hyperion book, but I might have to put it down to prioritize
| this. It does seem like somewhat of an investment though; as
| if reading it in bed might not be the most optimal way to
| enjoy the experience. It might require some more dedicated
| reading sessions from what I'm seeing in the other threads.
| zvrba wrote:
| Hah, have learned about the book while searching for the text
| that androids repeat during their "evaluation" in Blade Runner 2.
| gizmo wrote:
| When people recommend Russian literature I'm always curious what
| they think about the _other_ great Russian literary works.
| Because I find unnecessary complexity unbearable. I have no
| desire to read literature with 100+ named characters, unreliable
| narrators and Escher-like chronology. For some people narrative
| complexity is a draw but if I can 't put a book down and come
| back to it two weeks later without having to start from the
| beginning it's just not for me.
| CydeWeys wrote:
| Admittedly The Brothers Karamazov has a lot of characters, but,
| it does run linearly! And it's not so hard to refer to the
| Wikipedia article for a character list as necessary.
|
| I think the problem is some people expect to not have to do any
| work when reading literary novels.
| gizmo wrote:
| I find that literature that requires work does not provide
| more food or insight into the human condition or a sense of
| wonder (or whichever benchmark you choose) than simpler and
| more accessible works. If complexity is not what makes the
| work valuable, what purpose does it serve? I posit that for
| some people complexity for the sake of complexity _is_ the
| appeal.
| mykowebhn wrote:
| I just wanted to point out the logical gymnastics you just
| performed here: I find it true, thus it is true
| universally.
|
| Your initial premise: "I find that literature that requires
| work does not provide more food or insight into the human
| condition..."
|
| Your conclusion from this premise: "If complexity is not
| what makes the work valuable, what purpose does it serve?"
|
| And you answer your own question with a cynical take: "I
| posit that for some people complexity for the sake of
| complexity _is_ the appeal."
|
| This makes me want to kick myself for reading Hacker News
| to be illuminated about the arts.
|
| Still, I love user lermontov!
| gizmo wrote:
| I made no such universal statement. Some people enjoy
| hard things simply because they are hard. My claim is
| that this can also result in people thinking some
| literature is better than it is, because people draw
| satisfaction from the effort itself.
| mykowebhn wrote:
| Okay, I got that.
|
| The point you might be missing is that some people might
| enjoy hard things not only because they are hard, but
| because only through their laborious efforts is the true
| brilliance of the work revealed.
| gizmo wrote:
| Since that is the entirely conventional take on
| literature I couldn't possibly be missing that.
|
| (Edit: re-reading what I wrote earlier I can see how it
| can be read that way. My bad. )
| CydeWeys wrote:
| Off the top of my head, every book I can think of that
| provides deep insight into the human condition does require
| putting in some work. Let's take as an example "Night" by
| Elie Wiesel, a book that is written so simply it is
| typically assigned in middle school (that's when I read
| it). Well, it was assigned in school for a reason --
| there's a lot of work to put in to learn more about the
| history of the Holocaust, concentration camps, and
| specifically the death marches, as well as the actual full
| biography of the author (the novel is an autobiography but
| it only covers one early part of his life).
| filleduchaos wrote:
| Exactly - if a work really was so simple that it required
| no work to understand it, what insight _could_ it
| possibly give into the human condition? Plenty of
| "simple" works are reliant on the _reader_ already having
| done work to grasp it, from growing up in the right
| country /culture/subculture to learning the right things
| in school.
| gizmo wrote:
| That's why I talked about unnecessary complexity. Of
| course many hard things in life are worthwhile. I don't
| think anybody would argue otherwise.
| thuuuomas wrote:
| What are some examples of complex works? What are some
| examples of simpler, more accessible works?
| Boogie_Man wrote:
| The Penguin Classics edition of TBK contains a character
| guide which is indispensable for western readers.
| oraknabo wrote:
| You could maybe tie Nabakov's humor to Gogol or Bulgakov, but
| he doesn't tell complex stories like Tolstoy or the longer
| Dostoevsky books. Maybe Pale Fire is like Notes from the
| Underground or Crime & Punishment in a way, but his work isn't
| really traditional Russian Lit. Nabakov's got as much in common
| with Joyce & Pynchon as any Russian writers.
| vundercind wrote:
| Pushkin's short fiction is often great (if uneven, especially
| the early stuff) and doesn't (can't) do the 1,000 characters
| and complex chronology thing.
| mykowebhn wrote:
| While I understand your point of view, and even share it from
| time to time, if art were limited to those works that were
| easily accessible, the world would be much poorer for it.
|
| Think of how different the world would be if all Beethoven
| composed were Fur Elise-type pieces, and he never composed
| anything as complex--and inaccessible--as his Grosse Fuge.
|
| In my experience, my favorite books have been the ones that
| required me to work a little.
| dilyevsky wrote:
| Read Solzhenitsyn or Bulgakov (earlier works like Heart of a
| Dog, not MM)
| dang wrote:
| You might try some of the shorter ones. e.g. from the 19th
| century: Gogol's short stories, Dostoevsky's "The Double",
| Turgenev's "Fathers and Children". They weren't all baggy
| monsters!
| The_Blade wrote:
| plus a billion for Turgenev. Bazarov is the original hipster
|
| also Pushkin's Queen of Spades
| cafard wrote:
| Tolstoy writes pretty straightforward narrative doesn't he?
| emptybits wrote:
| > I have no desire to read literature with 100+ named
| characters
|
| Personal share ... I had the same hesitance about getting into
| Tolstoy. I read The Death Of Ivan Ilyich -- it's short and has
| few characters. Absolutely loved it. That sealed the deal so
| I'm working through Anna Karenina now. I'm reading the Rosamund
| Bartlett translation and it's just superb so I don't really
| care about the torrent of names and characters. It's worth it
| IMO.
| mycologos wrote:
| +1 for The Death of Ivan Ilyich, it's a marvelous example of
| an author depicting something you (probably) haven't
| experienced and nonetheless convincing you that's what it's
| really like.
| sixo wrote:
| There's a certain literary canon of "men of genius" and often
| Nabokov is recommended from this reference frame; people
| rightly react to its invocation. "Don't be terrified of Pale
| Fire" frames "Pale Fire" as an impenetrable manifestation of
| the essence of genius, implying that if you were at the right
| level you'd get it, but--condescendingly--it's still "okay" if
| you don't get it! That framing is nonsense. It's a thing that's
| fun for some people, and a certain kind of lit-bro mistakingly
| believes that what they like is what's genuinely Good and what
| every smart person should like. I expect your aversion is
| actually to that voice which takes for granted that "smart-
| sounding" is equivalent to literary merit for everyone else,
| too.
|
| In fact, Pale Fire is quite a straightforward story, with a
| creative form with some puzzles to decipher if you feel like
| it. Or you can brush past them; the suspicious presence of
| contradictions is a delight in itself. It was fun for me at 22
| but at 33 I would not go back and read it--I don't recall it
| being particularly deep, but it was a good time. I'm more
| interested in the other Russians now. Not that Nabokov,
| Tolstoy, or Dostoevsky have anything to do with each other. One
| would never think to group them at all if they hadn't written
| in the same language.
| sleepydog wrote:
| I am not really well read on Russian literature (work in
| progress), but my impression is that they are all over the
| place in terms of complexity and accessibility. There's rube-
| goldberg contraptions of genius like Pale Fire, and at the same
| time short stories that are boiled down to the bare essence of
| a feeling like Chekov's _In the cart_. And Tolstoy can write a
| tome like War and Peace, while also writing Master & Man which
| approaches Hemingway in its brevity and efficiency.
|
| Nabokov's stories and reputation are intimidating, but if you
| drop your anxiety over missing the point, he's still a very
| entertaining, passionate writer. I definitely missed a lot when
| I read Pale Fire, but I still enjoyed it a lot, even being
| naive and taking everything at face value.
| Boogie_Man wrote:
| "I am the shadow of the waxwing slain
|
| By the false azure in the windowpane
|
| I am the smudge of ashen fluff
|
| And I lived on, flew on, in the reflected sky"
|
| I am ashamed that I will never command my native language as well
| as a man for whom it was a second. I don't even know if whom is
| right there.
| OldGuyInTheClub wrote:
| I think it was his third after Russian and French.
|
| I liked "The svelte stilettos of a frozen stillicide" and
|
| "How to locate in blackness, with a gasp,
|
| Terra the Fair, an orbicle of jasp."
| edflsafoiewq wrote:
| Nabokov's family was trilingual and he could read and write
| English before he could Russian. It wasn't really a second
| language to him.
| leephillips wrote:
| You destroyed this by altering the linebreaking. And it's
| misquoted in other ways.
| debo_ wrote:
| "Ada or Ardor" is my favorite book that I didn't understand.
| hristov wrote:
| Tell me about it. I think it was on the second reading that i
| figured out it was supposed to be alternate reality science
| fiction. In the beginning I started reading it because it had
| footnotes, naively thinking that the footnotes would explain
| all the bizarre nabakoivsms. Quarter in the way in i was like
| "these are the worst footnotes ever, they do not explain
| anything but make things even more bewildering; and why, when
| the novels characters switch between four languages, dont the
| footnotes provide translations, at least". I looked in the back
| to see who wrote these footnotes, and it was a Russian name i
| did not recognize. I looked him up on the internet, wondering
| how this random idiot managed to get these inept footnotes
| published with he last work of a genius, and sure enough, it
| turned out it was Nabakov that did the footnotes.
|
| Yeah, nevertheless, the book is great fun and i have read it
| three times. I read that Pale Fire is even more of a puzzlebox
| than Ada or Ardor, and i dont think i am ready for that yet.
| But maybe someday, when i am feeling adventurous.
| razadots wrote:
| I love Nabokov. In fact, I named a stray cat after him who has
| since abandoned me. Or I, him. If you want a more approachable
| book of his to start off (pale fire is tremendous but daunting) I
| would recommend Laughter in the Dark. It is short and moves
| effortlessly. The characters are charming and evil. The plot
| reads like a suspense thriller. It is a wicked, wicked
| delightfully wicked book.
|
| Anyways, if you've seen my cat please feed him.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| Luzhin's Defense / The Defense / Zashchita Luzhina is awesome
| too.
| mlsu wrote:
| I read Pale Fire on the plane recently. Picked it up randomly,
| knew almost nothing about it. It is absolutely riotous. Most of
| the references probably went over my head, but I was immediately
| annoyed, then grinning about how annoyed I was, then tearing into
| the next page to try to unwrap just who the hell is Kinbote.
| About 10 pages in you will discover that you're never going to
| fully figure it out, and then the question is where the hell is
| this character going to take you. To the fractal depths of his
| soul, turns out.
|
| And obviously the lettering is a lyrical joy.
|
| 10/10
| wmorse wrote:
| I read it randomly, too, having found it in a summer vacation
| house. Found it hilarious, once I finally caught on, and went
| back and re-read it over the summer. Isn't most "great"
| literature best read if you discover it yourself? Much more fun
| than university seminars on Tolstoevsky, ne tak li?
| joaorico wrote:
| I suppose it's quite off-topic, but some weeks ago I read a small
| book by Mary Gaitskill, the writer of the piece.
|
| It's called "Lost Cat".
|
| I highly recommend it. Ironically, it might be an approximate
| opposite of Pale Fire. It's very short, with simple yet beautiful
| prose, filled with intense, raw emotions.
| booleandilemma wrote:
| _lest the reader feel the awful stammering of suppressed terror
| quavering through my words without knowing what they are
| feeling._
|
| What?
| fwip wrote:
| Context, for easy reference:
|
| > Pale Fire is one of the greatest books I've ever read. It is
| so great it is terrifying to write about. This is not something
| I would normally confess, but in this case it seems better to
| just come out and say it, lest the reader feel the awful
| stammering of suppressed terror quavering through my words
| without knowing what they are feeling. It is terrifying!
|
| The sentence fragment then means, "I wouldn't have mentioned
| that it's terrifying to write about, except I worry that the
| reader could tell that something was wrong by the way I wrote,
| but not know what."
| nickdrozd wrote:
| At the end of the foreword, Kinbote says:
|
| > Let me state that without my notes Shade's text simply has no
| human reality at all, since the human reality of such a poem as
| his ... has to depend entirely on the reality of its author and
| his surroundings, attachments and so forth, a reality that only
| my notes can provide. To this statement my dear poet would
| probably not have subscribed, but, for better or worse, it is the
| commentator who has the last word.
|
| Final exam questions:
|
| 1. To what extent did Nabokov agree or disagree with this
| approach to literary criticism?
|
| 2. Did Nabokov personally identify more with Shade or with
| Kinbote?
| kleer001 wrote:
| Tried it, couldn't get into it. And this was when I was
| unemployed and living with my now wife. So, I had time galore.
|
| It seems like a book you have to read cover to cover in one
| sitting to jam it all in your head.
|
| Now, from what I recall I did chuckle a couple times. But other
| than that it was a big shrug-fest to me. Just couldn't muster a
| care.
|
| I never thought I'd admit to such base and earthen attitude, nay
| vulgar. But there we are.
| AlbertCory wrote:
| When I saw this, I looked on my bookshelf. I know I read
| _something_ by Nabokov other than _Lolita_ , and I wondered if
| it was _Pale Fire_. It was.
|
| I remember liking it at the time, but that's all. Now I'm going
| to go back and read it again. Must have missed something.
| xefer wrote:
| In Pale Fire, Nabokov coins a couple of great collective nouns
| when he writes "... an anthology of poets and a brocken of their
| wives ..."
|
| The Brocken is the highest peak in the Harz mountains of Germany
| and is where witches are said to gather on Walpurgis Night. So it
| was quite a subtle dig.
| justin66 wrote:
| The main thing people who haven't read it need to know is, it's
| not a difficult read. A great book that's worth reading, but I'm
| not sure why the reviewer took the approach she did.
| chch wrote:
| I always saw Pale Fire as somewhat of self-parody, which made me
| enjoy it more.
|
| Seven years before Pale Fire came out, Nabokov was working on his
| translation of _Eugene Onegin_. Often, people argue that a
| translated novel should have no end /footnotes, because a "good
| translation" should read "naturally" to a reader. Nabokov
| disagreed, and wrote an article that included the phrase:
|
| > "I want translations with copious footnotes, footnotes reaching
| up like skyscrapers to the top of this or that page so as to
| leave only the gleam of one textual line between commentary and
| eternity." [1]
|
| Quite a fun image, and one he took somewhat seriously, as his
| endnote commentary for Onegin is more than twice as long as the
| translation itself! [2]
|
| So, for me personally, I can't imagine a world where he didn't
| reflect on his own zeal here, and realize "I think there's a
| novel idea in here somewhere!"
|
| [1] "Problems in Translation: Onegin in English." Partisan Review
| 22, no. 4 (1955): 512.
|
| [2]
| https://secondstorybooks.cdn.bibliopolis.com/pictures/136717...
| Lightkey wrote:
| I was so sure this would be a reference about the pale in Disco
| Elysium..
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-06-04 23:00 UTC)