Nabokov's "Screen Memory"

Mikołaj Wiśniewski
{"title":"Nabokov's \"Screen Memory\"","authors":"Mikołaj Wiśniewski","doi":"10.1353/NAB.2017.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:In his essay, Mikołaj Wiśniewski returns to the question of Nabokov's denunciation of Freud as (in the words of Geoffrey Green) \"a demonic monomaniacal champion of one interpretation for all situations\" who reduces the complexity of the individual mind, and the richness and originality of artistic vision, to vulgar clichés. Drawing on Green's analyses which point out striking similarities between Freud and Nabokov, most importantly—that they were \"two writers for whom the order of artistic form was also a falsification,\" Wiśniewski proposes to consider various well-known passages from Speak, Memory (most importantly, the Kuropatkin episode) in the light of Freud's 1899 essay \"Screen Memories.\" These passages, Wiśniewski argues, are perfect examples of memories serving as screens for disagreeable content which is \"displaced on to something associated by continuity\" in order to compensate for the disappointments of an inadequate reality. However, in the context of Nabokov's novels the notion of \"screen memories\" can also be read as \"memories produced for the screen,\" movie-memories, so to speak, which are produced with the help of cinematographic techniques. These techniques are described in Ada by Marina who is called a \"dummy [with a] screen-corrupted mind.\" Such \"screen memories\" are treated by Nabokov as examples of \"bad\" memory which he distinguishes, in one of his \"strong opinions,\" from the work of a \"good memoirist [who] does his best to preserve the utmost truth of the detail.\" Wiśniewski suggests that all such efforts on Nabokov's part to strictly separate \"good memory\" from \"bad\" are intentionally misleading and, in the long run, untenable. After all, in Nabokov's novels, time and again, the boundary separating memory from consoling fiction, or outright delusion, artistic genius from madness, often turns out to be quite fluid. What is more, in Speak, Memory Nabokov seems unable to do without the strategies of montage described by Marina. Similarly, Nabokov's oft-avowed aversion to Freud is designed to mask both the affinities between them and, perhaps, the real causes of that aversion.","PeriodicalId":110136,"journal":{"name":"Nabokov Studies","volume":"10 3 Suppl 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nabokov Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/NAB.2017.0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:In his essay, Mikołaj Wiśniewski returns to the question of Nabokov's denunciation of Freud as (in the words of Geoffrey Green) "a demonic monomaniacal champion of one interpretation for all situations" who reduces the complexity of the individual mind, and the richness and originality of artistic vision, to vulgar clichés. Drawing on Green's analyses which point out striking similarities between Freud and Nabokov, most importantly—that they were "two writers for whom the order of artistic form was also a falsification," Wiśniewski proposes to consider various well-known passages from Speak, Memory (most importantly, the Kuropatkin episode) in the light of Freud's 1899 essay "Screen Memories." These passages, Wiśniewski argues, are perfect examples of memories serving as screens for disagreeable content which is "displaced on to something associated by continuity" in order to compensate for the disappointments of an inadequate reality. However, in the context of Nabokov's novels the notion of "screen memories" can also be read as "memories produced for the screen," movie-memories, so to speak, which are produced with the help of cinematographic techniques. These techniques are described in Ada by Marina who is called a "dummy [with a] screen-corrupted mind." Such "screen memories" are treated by Nabokov as examples of "bad" memory which he distinguishes, in one of his "strong opinions," from the work of a "good memoirist [who] does his best to preserve the utmost truth of the detail." Wiśniewski suggests that all such efforts on Nabokov's part to strictly separate "good memory" from "bad" are intentionally misleading and, in the long run, untenable. After all, in Nabokov's novels, time and again, the boundary separating memory from consoling fiction, or outright delusion, artistic genius from madness, often turns out to be quite fluid. What is more, in Speak, Memory Nabokov seems unable to do without the strategies of montage described by Marina. Similarly, Nabokov's oft-avowed aversion to Freud is designed to mask both the affinities between them and, perhaps, the real causes of that aversion.
纳博科夫的《屏幕记忆》
摘要:Mikołaj Wiśniewski在他的文章中回到了纳博科夫谴责弗洛伊德的问题(用杰弗里·格林的话来说)“一个恶魔般的偏执狂,拥护一种对所有情况的解释”,他将个人思想的复杂性,以及艺术视野的丰富性和原创性,贬低为庸俗的陈词滥调。格林的分析指出了弗洛伊德和纳博科夫之间惊人的相似之处,最重要的是,他们是“两位作家,对他们来说,艺术形式的秩序也是一种伪造”,Wiśniewski建议根据弗洛伊德1899年的文章“屏幕记忆”来考虑《说话,记忆》中各种著名的段落(最重要的是,库罗帕特金的章节)。Wiśniewski认为,这些段落是记忆充当不愉快内容的屏幕的完美例子,这些内容“被转移到与连续性相关的东西上”,以补偿不充分的现实带来的失望。然而,在纳博科夫小说的语境中,“屏幕记忆”的概念也可以被解读为“为屏幕而产生的记忆”,可以说,电影记忆是在电影技术的帮助下产生的。玛丽娜在《艾达》中描述了这些技巧,她被称为“头脑被屏幕腐蚀的傻瓜”。这样的“屏幕记忆”被纳博科夫视为“糟糕”记忆的例子,在他的“强烈意见”中,他将其与“优秀的回忆录作者的作品区分开来,他们尽最大努力保留细节的最大真实性”。Wiśniewski认为,纳博科夫严格区分“好记忆”和“坏记忆”的所有努力都是故意误导,从长远来看,是站不住脚的。毕竟,在纳博科夫的小说中,一次又一次,记忆与安慰的虚构、或彻头彻尾的妄想、艺术天才与疯狂之间的界限往往是相当模糊的。更重要的是,在《说话,记忆》中,纳博科夫似乎离不开玛丽娜所描述的蒙太奇策略。同样,纳博科夫经常公开的对弗洛伊德的厌恶是为了掩盖他们之间的亲密关系,也许,这种厌恶的真正原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书