• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Vladimir Nabokov: The Enchanter

Herbal Tea?? Oh No! Give me caffeine, and lots of it. :p

Ahhhh.....thats better. Tannic Acid (tea) is a wonderful thing.
Coffee and chicory to follow.........
Peanutbutter.....

OK guys! Its morning, and the sun is (was) shining, a balmy 63 degrees, and we're off........
its actually 12:42 p.m. here, but I just had my tea.

And as for you SFG.......I'll have you know..........I am an old lady! So there, take that you young whipporsnapper...........:p :D
 
pontalba said:
Herbal Tea?? Oh No! Give me caffeine, and lots of it. :p


And as for you SFG.......I'll have you know..........I am an old lady! So there, take that you young whipporsnapper...........:p :D
Click to expand...

And I have nail polish that's older than pontalba, too! ;)
 
Good morning, all,

Been doing my rereading lately, just to keep Nabokovianly fit, and came across the following among the last pages in the book Enchanter. It is Dmitri Nabokov himself speaking about the story (p106)
The things I love about the story are, among others, the suspense (how will the reality betray the dream?) and the corollary of a surprise on every page; the eerie humor (the grotesque wedding night; the suspicious chauffeur who vaguely foreshadows Clare Quilty; the Shakespearean clown of a night porter; the protagonist's desparate search for the misplaced room -- will he emerge, as in "A Visit to a Museum," into a totally different town or will the old porter, whom he comes upon at last, react as if seeing him for the first time in this life?); the descriptions (the forest hopping from hill to hill only to trip over the highway, and much else); the preliminary glimpses of people and things with a parallel life of their own that will, incidentally or crucially, recur; the trucks ominously thundering in the night; the splendidly innovative use of Russian in the original; the cinematic imagery of the surreal conclusion and the frenzied pace, a kind of stretta finale, that accelerates toward the crashing climax."
Click to expand...
It is a summary quite reminiscent of his father's own thoughts of the "nerves" of the novel Lolita in his own afterword to the story.

In fact, a propos the "afterlife" discussion over in the Lolita thread, it is worth noting that DN's afterword, "On a Book Entitled The Enchanter," begins thus

The title for the following brief notes, which may interest the reader and perhaps answer a few questions, was chosen with the half-serious thought that a small echo of Father's postface to Lolita may amuse his shadow wherever it may be.
Click to expand...
His father's title was, of course, "On a Book Entitled Lolita."

After enough reading of Nabokov (father and son) it becomes clear that many connections across works are readily recognizable and that they begin to sound very familiar. One seems to develop a Nabokovian ear.

Enjoy the day,
peder
 
Peder
Its funny. When we first started this thread, and reading The Enchanter, it seemed there were few corresponding points with Lolita. The main points aside, there didn't seem to be too much. I do feel a "However" coming on though. :p

As we wend our way thru TE, more and more similarities and differences come to light. But the deal breaker seems to be in the character of the daughter. The unnamed child in TE not only has no name, she hasn't much of a character. Except where it counts. When she awakens in the hotel room......she screams bloody murder. Little Lo seems the exact opposite, up to a point. She has plenty of character, and is in fact a character :cool: . Shes like a loose cannon in Humbert's life. He never knows when she will "go off". Heh, heh. Lolita is plenty curious about life, sex, and just how much she can get away with. The unnamed daughter in TE is curious, as shown when the car accident takes place outside of the apartment, and shows a good amount of intelligence. Oh, also when she notices the "no hands" watch The Enchanter wears.

But in the end Lolita shows that she does in fact have gumption and moral fiber when she dumps both Humbert and then Quilty as well, which is actually more difficult for her as she thinks Quilty is the only man she has ever loved....:rolleyes: :rolleyes: . But give him up she does, and goes it alone. Not an easy choice. So, in the end both daughters show that they are cognizant of their worth as humans.
 
pontlba, I was very touched by your last post. I can tell that you've come to feel real affection and respect for that grubby little hellion, Dolores Haze. :)
 
pontalba said:
So, in the end both daughters show that they are cognizant of their worth as humans.
Click to expand...
Pontalba,
That's a keen observation. I think I earlier remarked that the daughter in TE was a 'normal' girl, in rare contrast to most other Nabokov characters who are quaint or strange in one way or another. I probably overstated that a bit, in that she was certainly flatter than most real people (no giggling, now :rolleyes:) while Lolita was certainly well rounded out with very noticeable personality. But as you say they were both eventually worthy human beings and that seems to be a strand that Nabokov finds in the characters that I know of. Including Humbert, and except for Quilty, who alone comes across as close to purely evil. It raises the thought that Nabokov is at pains to see the humanity in his people despite the extreme and exaggerated diversity that he gives them. And, rambling on, that the tensions between the opposites within a single person are the most interesting tensions that we readers struggle to resolve in Lolita. [?]

So let me add here, as a convenient place to hang it, another interesting and somewhat relevant summary that I came across this morning. Again from Leona Toker's essay, "Nabokov's Worldview," in the Cambridge Companion to Nabokov,
The ethical ideology in Nabokov's fiction can be described as... respect and concern for the rights of the individual -- so long as that individual's aims do not encroach on the rights of other individuals. Some of Nabokov's characters (... Timofey Pnin, John Shade) respect the rights of others to an independent identity; others solipsistically ignore that right (...VanVeen); still others actively violate it (Humbert, Kinbote).
Click to expand...
where I have only shown the characters I recognize (from Pnin, Pale Fire, Ada, Lolita) So we see that Pnin and Humbert are poles apart, just as their stories are so completely different, and that John Shade from Pale Fire is up there with the undeniable good-guys (about which there could never be any doubt). Whether, or how, or if, Nabokov comes to show the humanity in VanVeen from Ada remains to be seen.

Is this Philosohy Saturday, all of a sudden? :eek: :D
Time for that wonderful first coffee, :)
Peder
 
StillILearn said:
pontlba, I was very touched by your last post. I can tell that you've come to feel real affection and respect for that grubby little hellion, Dolores Haze. :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, and I am buggered if I know why;) , I still consider her a manipulative little brat. :p

But in a good way. :D
 
Peder

I've yet to read too very much in the Cambridge/Nabokov, but am glad to hear that quote. It shows that Nabokov's characters in general are pretty realistic. And in such a way as to show the better side along with some crummy. You know, you are right. I can't think of one redeeming factor in Quilty. Unfortunately there are too many of that kind of 'bad guy' in the world. At least Humbert was anguished over what he was doing and had already done. /sigh/ If. If if were a skiff, we'd all go for a ride.
 
pontalba said:
But in the end Lolita shows that she does in fact have gumption and moral fiber when she dumps both Humbert and then Quilty as well, which is actually more difficult for her as she thinks Quilty is the only man she has ever loved....:rolleyes: :rolleyes: . But give him up she does, and goes it alone. Not an easy choice. So, in the end both daughters show that they are cognizant of their worth as humans.
Click to expand...
Pontalba,
The more I thought of your post over lunch the more I liked it (It shows what a good meal will do for a man's heart :D). I thought the two girls to be different in two major ways but, most of all, that Lolita was so hard to figure out in contrast to the clear virtue of Rochelle*. I am glad to see that you have seen a major way that the two girls are the same, and in an important way that dwarfs their differences. Applause! Brava!

*Why Rochelle? I'n tired of calling her 'the daughter' and decided to give her a virtuous sounding name, at least for this post. :) She deserves a name.:cool:

Peder
 
Peder said:
*Why Rochelle? I'n tired of calling her 'the daughter' and decided to give her a virtuous sounding name, at least for this post. :) She deserves a name.:cool:

Peder
Click to expand...
LOL! She does indeed deserve a name. Rochelle it is. Its a solid-sounding pretty name, it fits. Plus the French Flair. :)

SIL and Steffee Since the both of you seem to like Atwood, can you tell me the attraction? I've only read The Handmaiden's Tale, and was not impressed one little bit. Depressing being the least of it. I'd really like to understand why people like her writing.
 
pontalba said:
SIL and Steffee Since the both of you seem to like Atwood, can you tell me the attraction? I've only read The Handmaiden's Tale, and was not impressed one little bit. Depressing being the least of it. I'd really like to understand why people like her writing.
Click to expand...

:eek: :eek:

I loved Handmaid's Tale! It wasn't the first of hers I read though, and it did take ages and ages to get into, but after persevering with it, it was well worth it.

It was nowhere near her best though, in my opinion. The Edible Woman was very good, as was Oryx and Crake and Alias Grace, all of which were better than Handmaid's Tale.

I don't know what the attraction is to be honest, she is very dry, but her take on female ostracisation is interesting, I reckon, especially since we are so fortunate today to have "equal" rights, and all that.
 
steffee said:
I don't know what the attraction is to be honest, she is very dry, but her take on female ostracisation is interesting, I reckon, especially since we are so fortunate today to have "equal" rights, and all that.
Click to expand...

I found it deeply disturbing. Perhaps the very matter of fact manner of her writing is what put me off. But if it educates some as to what could happen, or what some would actually want to happen, well.......

Just not my cuppa.
 
pontalba said:
I found it deeply disturbing. Perhaps the very matter of fact manner of her writing is what put me off. But if it educates some as to what could happen, or what some would actually want to happen, well.......

Just not my cuppa.
Click to expand...

Well, the world would be a boring place if we all liked the same things, and all that :)
 
steffee said:
(sorry to temporaily hi-jack thread... :rolleyes: :eek: )

Still, what's Bodily Harm like so far?
Click to expand...

Entertaining, steffee. Dark. A mystery of sorts. She's a really good writer, but not what you'd call cheery. I'm don't really know why I'm reading Atwood instead of Pnin or Pale Fire.

I found this quote by her in the Atwood thread:

My relatives are all from Nova Scotia. That's sort of like being from Maine. The deadpan humour, the scepticism about human motives, and the tendency to tell straight-faced lies for fun, to see if you can get the listener to believe them.

The French have an expression: "Anglo-Saxon humour." It isn't the same as wit. It's dark; it's when something is funny and awful at the same time. "Gallows humour" is called that partly because highwaymen about to be hanged were much admired if they could crack a joke in the face of death.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: There is a dark side to me, I guess, that appreciates Atwood's humor; probably the same side of me that that also likes Barbara Vine. I really am this polite and peace-loving granny that you see, but somewhere beneath also lurks an anarchistic female who appreciates writers like Atwood. It's the same woman who quietly rejoiced when novella, Moto and Freya begin acting up in the Wabbit? thread. (And who likes writing in invisible ink!) Maybe Freud would be able to figure me out? I guess I'll go bump the Atwood thread now so's we don't mortally hijack this one. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top