Messageboard
The Village Hall聽 permalink
January Book of the Month Club
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.聽
Posted by Herb Robert (U14072548) on Saturday, 21st January 2012
鈥淧ale Fire鈥 by Vladimir Nabokov, first published in 1962, is this month's book. Everyone is most welcome to contribute. For other titles that have been or are to be discussed, please go to the main Book of the Month Club thread at .
The book is divided into four very unequal parts: a Forward (13 pages of text in my edition), a poem, Pale Fire (30 pages), a Commentary (176 pages) and an Index (10 pages.) It reflects the structure (and balance) of many school or academic texts on poetry in that the bulk of the book is devoted to the commentary. However, unlike most other texts of this kind, the Commentary has almost nothing to do with the poem itself, but is an attempt by the commentator to see meaning where none was ever intended.
The forward is by the commentator, Charles Kinbote (CK), and is a bizarre thing in itself 鈥 it contains hints of what can only be described as his unhinged character and his penchant for young boys (and their 鈥渂old virilia鈥 - see Commentary to line 130. There is a very funny description of his 鈥渃alamitous鈥 marriage in the Commentary to lines 433-434, where CK is put off by the 鈥渁nterior characters of [his wife's] unfortunate sex鈥 and persuades her that what he needs is a 鈥渃ruise with his old pals and a lot of sea bathing.鈥). It prepares us for the developing story of the exiled King of Zembla which is what the Commentary is largely about. But in spite of himself, CK reveals that he is actually stalking the poet of Pale Fire, John Shade (JS), so clearly all is not well.
The poem, in itself, a 999-line work verging on a pastiche of Poe and Wordsworth, is more or less the life story of JS in all its humdrum mundanity and everyday tragedy. There are some wonderful lines and images (鈥淚 was the shadow of the waxwing slain / By the false azure in the windowpane (lines 1-2)), but also some excruciatingly banal ones (鈥淭he house itself is much the same. One wing / We've had revamped. There's a solarium鈥 (lines 58-9.)) There is one extraordinary strophe on shaving (lines 907-922) which to me is almost like hearing fingernails scraping on a blackboard.
The Commentary is the novelistic heart of the book. It proceeds by picking out certain words, phrases or lines and then bending them to read into them the supposed story of Charles the Beloved, King of Zembla, which CK believes he has been persuading JS to work into a poem. As the Commentary continues it becomes apparent not only that CK believes himself to be the King, but that CK himself is in fact a simple teacher of Russian by the name of Botkin. The supposed assassin of Charles the Beloved turns out to be an escapee from the local lunatic asylum 鈥 and surely there has never been a more incompetent hit-man in literature (see the Commentary to line 171)?
The Index is a joy in itself; try following the references to 鈥淲ord Golf,鈥 for example, or 鈥渢aynik.鈥 And while CK and JS are extensively indexed, JS's wife Sybil is dismissed with a 鈥減assim鈥 - CK really did not get on well with her and this one-word entry encapsulates their whole relationship.
I love this book in all its strange beauty 鈥 from the tantalising Forward, to the strange Poem, to the sheer comic madness of the Commentary and, finally, to the self-serving and more-or-less useless Index. It sparkles throughout with wit and invention, it challenges and involves the reader at every level and delights in scintillating word-play.
It is this word-play that is so rich; Nabokov, though English was of course his second language, is extraordinarily attuned to the nuances of English. To give just one example of his exuberant joy in words, I give a short extract from the Commentary on lines 433-434: 鈥'I want you to know that no matter how much you hurt me, you cannot hurt my love,' and this sentence (if we re-English it from the Zemblan) came out as: 'I desire you and love when you flog me.'鈥 Clearly Nabokov anticipated the Google translator many years before its incarnation. On a more intense note, see the comment, for example, on the word 鈥渋ridule鈥 in the Commentary to line 109.
To me the essence of the book is summed up in something CK overhears and which probably refers to himself: 鈥渞eplacing a drab and unhappy past with a brilliant invention鈥 (Commentary to line 629). Even though we are given some sort of insight into the mind of a fantasist and possibly a madman, it is this aside which somehow reminds even the most level-headed of us that we are at least capable of the invention of a past that suits and flatters us, and that maybe we only differ in degree from CK.
Anyway, that's my introduction. I look forward to hearing what others make of it and to sharing some more favourite moments later. -
Message 2
Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Saturday, 21st January 2012
Thanks very much for opening this discussion, Herb, and for choosing this book. Gosh, it was a real discovery for me! I had never read any Nabokov and knew nothing about him except that he was 'a famous Russian author'. I knew the name in the world of chess, but never ever thought they were one and the same. His life was very interesting to read about in its own right. I think he was brought up speaking English and French, and was given extra lessons to bring his Russian up to scratch (that language being spoken by the servants at the time). His father was assassinated by mistake (did that have a bearing on John Slade's death?). I'm sure there are all sorts of semi autobiographical references in this book.
Anyway, on to 'Pale Fire'. Well, I did what I usually do, and ignored all comments before I had actually read it myself. SO, I skipped over the forward and read the poem just as that - straight (and there /are/ some beautiful passages in it, as well as some banal lines). Still, I enjoyed reading it. The description of his daughter's death was moving.
THEN I read the forward, and so the surprise I had when I realised by the end of the first page that this was actually /part/ of the novel was quite delightful. Inadvertently, I was not reading in a linear way, which is OK too, with this book.
The commentary was very funny in places. As the story of Zembla evolved, I became really engrossed in the book, though I didn't often check back to the actual lines of the poem. There were so many snippets of information - sometimes throw-away comments by others to CK that were actually very important, so slowly we get a picture of how mad he really is. Botkin was hardly mentioned, so it was only on reading a (very good) review by Mary McCarthy that I understood this final layer (as this book is multi-layered!).
Anyway, when I got to the index, I was almost shrieking with laughter at some points. Very funny indeed!
Certainly a book to re-read (though not necessarily in a linear way, as I have said). -
Message 3
Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Monday, 23rd January 2012
Just thee and me, then Herb. I feel rather sad, as this is a very fine book indeed. Oh well. I thought your choice for last year ('The Third Policeman') was an amazing book, but I think 'Pale Fire' tops even that.
-
Message 4
Posted by Herb Robert (U14072548) on Monday, 23rd January 2012
I was about to say the same thing, Bette, but I was in a state of nomenclatorial agitation about a bird I'd spotted in the back garden.
-
Message 5
Posted by Rusters (U11225963) on Sunday, 29th January 2012
I'm very sorry to report that I really couldn't get into 'Pale Fire', despite being trapped with it during a long train journey. I enjoyed (if that is the right word) 'Lolita', possibly because I'd seen the 1962 film first, though.
In my defence, one of my friends who loves Nabokov couldn't stand 'Pale Fire' either. Go figure, as they say.
Incidentally, Herb, I read an article a few months ago about David Vann. The way the author described his childhood, much of it spent with his ghastly grandfather and even worse father, goes a long way to explain why he is as he is, and writes as he writes. Poor man.
Rusty -
Message 6
Posted by Herb Robert (U14072548) on Monday, 30th January 2012
Thanks for letting us know, Rusters - it helps, I think, if we get some idea of whether people have tried and given up or have just not started for whatever reason. And of course I'm sorry that you didn't enjoy the book - Nabokov can be one of those writers who astound and appal in equal measure; I certainly had to give up on Bend Sinister, so I'm certainly not going to suggest that I find all his work equally appealing.
Interesting that you say you were stuck on the train with Pale Fire, because the first time I read it was on the train from Cheltenham to Edinburgh (funny how these things stick with you), and I found the journey just flew past. It might be interesting on another occasion to discuss train journeys made memorable by books we have read! In fact, given the response to this thread, perhaps we could branch out now - any takers?
Thanks for the note about David Vann - I didn't know about his background, and in fact I tend to try and avoid all information about writers, feeling that the books should stand by themselves. Another topic for discussion?
If there's anyone else out there who would care to share why they were put off by Pale Fire as the choice for this month's book, I'd be most interested to hear, if only so that we have an idea of how future books should be selected. -
Message 7
Posted by Pahnda (U14681704) on Monday, 30th January 2012
Hi Herb Robert, from someone offering apologies that I did not take the time or trouble to read your book choice. I have completely missed the list for 2012.
-
Message 8
Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Monday, 30th January 2012
I agree with your point in that post, Herb, that it would be useful to have some feedback on why people do /not/ read) books.
tbh, I think the response to these monthly threads has been so paltry, that I can't see the club continuing beyond the next few months. I'll post about this on the rota thread, though! -
Message 9
Posted by Rwth of the Cornovii (U2570790) on Saturday, 11th February 2012
I should say here that I was put off reading Pale Fire because I don't really like Nabokov. I have tried to read him before and I find him very clever and admirable but only from a distance. Even when he has been on TV, there was nothing for my mind to latch on to, and it was like climbing a very beautiful marble building with no equipment except one's fingernails. It is perhaps too perfect.
I will see if I can reserve a copy through the library and try again, but I am already snowed in with other books. -
Message 10
Posted by savannahlady (U2362903) on Saturday, 11th February 2012
I have to say that I too have struggled with Nabokov in the past. Maybe I should try again now that I am much older than I was when I first tried reading him?
It would be a shame if the Book of the Month thread died, though you would be perfectly correct to say that I have not been a great supporter of it! I think I did do a starter review some years back (it was in E.Yore's day and how I miss her BTW) and have commented on the (very) odd occasion. Part of the trouble is that I already read with two monthly Book Groups and it is hard to find the time to do another on top of 'work' and RL. Plus sometimes one just wants to read stuff that you don't 'have' to do, which can get one feeling a little like being back in school or university with book lists!
I shall try and do better in future!
all the best to fellow bookworms
Savvie
About this Board
Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.
or 聽to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
This messageboard is now closed.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
主播大秀 iD
主播大秀 navigation
主播大秀 links
主播大秀 漏 2014 The 主播大秀 is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.